W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2009

Re: Moratorium on the spec-splitting discussion

From: Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:33:09 +0000
Message-ID: <498088C5.7080502@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
CC: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org



Sam Ruby wrote:

> 3) Votes, by themselves, aren't prescriptive enough.  The vote was 
> 47-53.  Now what?  This is the weakest issue I have, as it can 
> straightforwardly addressed by requiring a justification.  But it still 
> leaves a few loose ends: when to hold a vote?  Only if you are sure of 
> the results?  Early and often?  Can somebody just keep retrying until a 
> vote passes?

Some years ago, I was elected foreman of a jury.  Immediately
we entered the jury room, I called a vote.  The jury was
divided 50:50.  We discussed the case, and when everyone
had had a chance to speak, I called a second vote.  We were
now divided 8:4.  The process was repeated until we had
reached 11:1, at which point the one person not agreeing
with the majority acquiesced, and we were able to return
a unanimous decision.  I cannot see why a similar process
should not lead to an equally amicable and satisfactory
outcome here.

Philip TAYLOR
Received on Wednesday, 28 January 2009 16:33:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:28 GMT